Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
19th-Century Amateur Music Societies in France and the Changes of InstrumentConstruction: Their Evolution Caught between Passivity and ProgressAuthor(s): Jean-Yves RaulineSource: The Galpin Society Journal, Vol. 57 (May, 2004), pp. 236-245, 218Published by: Galpin SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25163804 .
Accessed: 18/11/2013 21:24
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
Galpin Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Galpin SocietyJournal.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 216.87.207.2 on Mon, 18 Nov 2013 21:24:37 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JEAN-YVES RAULINE
19th-century Amateur Music Societies in
France and the changes of Instrument
Construction: Their Evolution Caught
Between Passivity and Progress
The 19th century in France was characterized
by great progress in instrument making,
especially in the case of woodwind and brass
instruments. Improvements were made in the design of the flute, the clarinet and the oboe, and the
invention of valves made radical changes in brass
instruments possible and so on. In the same way,
instrument makers, who often worked alone in
small workshops began to be supplanted by large
firms, using a range of industrial processes. Instrumental musical societies, such as wind
ensembles and brass bands, whose number continu
ally increased between the French Second Empire and
the First World War, which were included in the so
called Orpheonic movement, necessarily had to take a
stand in the light of these improvements. Accordingly, the question is?did they adopt the latest improve
ments which had been invented and patented by the manufacturers, as the Orpheonic authorities en
couraged them, or did they prefer a more pragmatic
position, bearing in mind their traditions, the reality of their financial positions and the needs of their
teaching activities? The object of this article is to
examine?using the example ofthe societies of Upper
Normandy1?the conditions in which they had to
take their stand, such as the pressure exerted by makers and Orpheonic authorities, and the reasons
which guided their choices, as regards both wood
winds and brass instruments.
THE PRESSURE EXERTED BY MAKERS AND ORPHEONIC AUTHORITIES ON MUSICAL SOCIETIES
The different makers quickly understood the great benefits they could obtain from the development of
amateur musical societies. If the latter were to take
advantage of these developments they would have to provide their members with instruments of
good quality, well tuned and easy to play. So they considered that the new improvements made in
woodwind and brass instrument-making would be an excellent opportunity for them to buy these new instruments, as was customary in the French
Army military bands. These, together with the
Imperial Guard, and later the Republican Guard in
particular, were the main model for these musical
societies as to both their rules and the composition of their instrumental ensembles which they adopted for use with the new and improved instruments.
So the makers hoped that both the societies and
their military counterparts would take up the
latest improvements made and patented by them
in order to perform good quality music. Among
them, Adolphe Sax was in an excellent position: his instruments had been ordered by the French
Army as a result of their good quality, their brilli
ance, their volume, and their ease of use. He was also
the official maker to the Emperor's Military House
(Maison Militaire de l'Empereur).
1 For further details about the Orpheonic Movement in Upper Normandy, see: J. Y. Rauline, Les societes musicales en
Haute-Normandie (1792-1914): contribution a une histoire sociale de la musique, Villeneuve d'Ascq: Presses
universitaires du Septentrion, coll. 'Theses a la carte', May 2001.
236
This content downloaded from 216.87.207.2 on Mon, 18 Nov 2013 21:24:37 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Rauline?19th Century Amateur Music Societies in France 237
In addition to the maker's arguments, the
development of industrial processes including mass
production would make the new instruments
cheaper and easier to afford by amateur musical
societies. In their advertisements for example, in a
letter sent by Besson to some local authorities
concerned with establishing musical societies,2 they did not fail to set out the advantages that they would
obtain in buying their new instruments rather than
continuing to use former models or second-hand
instruments. The latter were still in common use
because naturally they were cheaper and were often
given to pupils because it was thought that a
beginner could damage a new instrument.
Makers were not alone in influencing amateur
musical societies. The Orpheonic authorities also
exerted pressure on them to improve the musical
quality of their instruments. Thus, at the end of
1857, they established a national commission to
standardise the different wind ensembles and brass
bands of France.3 The object of this commission was
to define ideal groupings for the instruments in order to remedy the bad quality of the ensembles as
regards their homogeneity of sound, their loudness, their tune and their ease of use. So it produced a first
list of standard ensembles?as shown in the docu ments in Annexe 1 using existing instruments, and
taking care to keep a good balance between the
different voices. In particular, the inner voices were
not sacrificed in favour of the melodic and bass
parts. It may be observed that Sax's instruments were not included in these classifications. This omission was remedied by Jules Simon?one of the
Orpheonic authorities?who wrote several articles in 1862 and 1863 in the journal I'Orpheon (the
main Orpheonic periodical between 1855 and
1939) in which he recommended, in glowing terms, the instruments of Sax?and not only the saxo
phones, but also the saxhorns and the saxotrombas - both for wind ensembles and brass bands. He also
devised other ideal groupings including these instru ments?see Annexe 2?in which we can find the
same concern for balance between upper, inter
mediate and lower voices, and these were adopted for use in several kinds of societies. The main policy of the Orpheonic authorities was to provide oppor tunities for improvement of the maximum number
of musical societies in all the rural provinces of
France bearing in mind the limited financial resources of many towns, which explains why
clarinets were relatively fewer than they are today in
wind ensembles. In addition to their work of recommending
ensemble groupings, in 1858-1859, the Orpheonic authorities applied themselves to the establishment
of an official pitch standard. They wrote a letter to
the government in which they invited it to appoint a
commission for standardisation in order to remedy the bad quality of tuning in musical societies?a
unification that they considered impossible to
achieve without its authority.4 Fortunately, they were fully satisfied with the work of the Lissajous
Halevy Commission in 1859 and they immediately invited all musical societies to adopt the new pitch.
The Orpheonic authorities saw the improvements in
instrument design and manufacture, and a common
pitch standard, as essential elements in national
musical progress?a concept which grew through out society in 19th-century France.
So, for a variety of reasons, musical societies in
the middle of 19th century were encouraged to
purchase modern instruments and to update their
performing practices. But did they really do so?
BETWEEN THEORY AND REALITY: THE PRAGMATIC POSITION OF THE MUSICAL SOCIETIES
From theory to practice, there is a long way to go. In
fact, musical societies adopted a pragmatic position for reasons which will be dealt with in the third part of this article. This position was quite different with
woodwind, on the one hand, and brass instruments,
on the other.
With regard to woodwind, the societies preferred to keep their old instruments. Two examples will
illustrate this: first, in the sales contract which was
signed on 17 December 1861 between the Prefect of
the Departement of Eure (in Upper-Normandy),
Eugene Janvier de la Motte, and the Parisian maker
Lecomte;5 the objective was to purchase new instru ments for the wind ensemble of the city of Evreux in order to make the best music in the Departement. It
was, in fact, a political decision of the prefect because this ensemble had to escort him during his electoral travels. Accordingly it was to be expected that new models would be preferred instead of old ones. However, this was not the case, and old-style
flutes, thirteen-keyed clarinets and twelve-keyed oboes were chosen instead of the Boehm system and
2 Archives of the city of Evreux, cote 2 R 45.
3 Journal L'Orpheon, no. 55 of January, 1st, 1858.
4 Ibid., no. 69 of August, 1st, 1858.
5 Archives of the city of Evreux, cote 2 R 45.
This content downloaded from 216.87.207.2 on Mon, 18 Nov 2013 21:24:37 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
238 The Galpin Society Journal
the oboes made by Guillaume and Frederic Triebert.
Surprisingly it was not just a matter of affordability, for the amount of the whole contract was 7,000 F?a
very large amount, if we consider that, during the same year, the neighbouring Departement of Seine
Inferieure (today Seine Maritime) spent only 4,000 F
in subsidies to all its musical societies. This amount
was covered to the extent of 2,000 F by the city of Evreux with an additional 5,000 F from the
Departement! Considering that this subsidy was the
outcome of a political decision, the Departement would most probably have been able to pay more
had the various wind ensembles opted to purchase modern instruments. The other example is the letter
sent to the maker Adrien Thibouville by the con
ductor of the wind ensemble 'Les Enfants des
Corbieres' in Durban (in the south of France) on
19 May 1910, wanting to purchase a 'second-hand
and clean ordinary oboe with thirteen keys and two
rings' for one of his pupils?an instrument which
was almost obsolete.6
Only very few societies were able to purchase new models, though at the end of the century, the
wind ensemble from Bernay bought Boehm system instruments and a 'conservatory system' English
horn though it must be said that this was very
exceptional,7 while the ensemble from La Couture
Boussey also bought Boehm system instruments and even an E flat alto clarinet.8 Bass clarinets, inci
dentally, were not generally included in wind
ensembles, except in the case of Bernay.9 The stance
taken by musical societies over woodwind instru
ments explains why today we can find many outmoded models in the Instrumental Museum of
La Couture-Boussey?models which were built, and
used, throughout the 19th century. It was not the same with the new brass instru
ments, because they were available for sale in entire
families, with the same fingering and the same
notation in the G clef from the sopranino to the
contrabass. Sax's instruments such as saxhorns and
saxotrombas were almost immediately adopted, as
is proved by the contract mentioned above, between
the Prefect of Eure and the maker Lecomte.
Curiously, it was not the case with the saxophone,
perhaps for the reason that it was more expensive
than the saxhorn or the saxotromba, less easy to
play than the clarinet and had a particular sound, which blended better with wind ensembles rather
than brass bands, which were more numerous in
rural towns. Among the former brass instruments,
only trumpets, bugles, natural horns and ophicleides were to survive in many ensembles throughout the
19th century. With respect to the adoption of an official pitch,
musical societies had to adjust their existing
instruments, which they did only very slowly. This is
shown very clearly in the contests organized by the
Orpheonic authorities, in which musical societies
could compare and assess themselves and where
they were classified by their level. So, in the com
petitions organized for the Universal Exhibition of
1867, all ensembles from Upper Normandy which
participated in these contests were tuned to the old
pitch, a practice perpetuated by many other French
societies. Even much later on, some societies were
resistant to change. I have found the following two
examples.10 In a contest in 1884, some societies
mixed the two pitches together?the old and the
new. In another contest in 1895, two brass bands
whose number of players was insufficient to com
pete separately, chose to play together?but they were each tuned to a different pitch. One can
imagine the result. It is true that there was much
resistance to the adoption of an official pitch by the
societies which were frightened by the expense
implied by the adjustment. For example, it is known
that the old members of the Philharmonic Society of
Dieppe did not want any change. But this was in
I860!11
So, while adopting a pragmatic position, musical
societies adjusted or replaced their instruments little
by little, keeping the former woodwind instruments
while generally acquiring the modern systems for
brass.
THE REASONS FOR THESE CHOICES
The first reason for not adopting new woodwind
instruments seems to be the matter of affordability. Instruments were very expensive for the small
budgets of the societies, which could not afford to
6 Courtesy private communication by Francois Camboulive, coll.: Thibouville-Camboulive, Ivry-la-Bataille (Eure).
Curiously, this seems in contradiction with the fact that, in French military wind ensembles, the Boehm oboe was
generally adopted. See: HOWE Robert, 'The Boehm System Oboe and its Role in the Development of the Modern
Oboe', in Galpin Society Journal, LVI, June 2003, pp.35-36. 7 Archives Departementales de l'Eure, cote 123 T 1, dossier ofthe society. 8 From the different scores we could examine in the Archives of the Instruments Museum of La Couture-Boussey.
9 Ibid., and Archives Departementales de l'Eure, cote 123 T 1, dossier ofthe society.
10 Journal L'Orpheon, no. 702 of February, 5,1885 and no. 1136 of April, 21,1895.
11 Ibid., no. 117 of June, 1st, 1860.
This content downloaded from 216.87.207.2 on Mon, 18 Nov 2013 21:24:37 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Rauline?19th Century Amateur Music Societies in France 239
replace their instruments all at once. The contract
mentioned above between the maker Lecomte and
the Prefect of the Departement of Eure for the wind
ensemble of the city of Evreux was, in this context,
very exceptional. For example, a flute or a clarinet
could cost around 100 to 295 F as is attested in 1862
in a list of prices of the main Parisian makers which
I found in the archives of the land forces.12 In the same document, I also found that a contrabass
saxhorn cost from 180 to 300 F which relatively, for the size and complexity of the instrument, is
cheaper: this can be explained by the fact that by this
time instruments were beginning to be made by mass
production methods, and there was a greater demand for them. Nevertheless, the high price of a
new instrument explains why ensembles sometimes
had to resort to second-hand models. Thus, in the
contract mentioned above, it was clearly established
that Lecomte had to repair the old models, and these
had to be offered to the many societies in the
Departement, which could not afford to purchase their own new instruments. Generally, the societies
had to be subsidized by local authorities in order to
replace their older models.
However, there were also musical reasons which
caused musical societies to choose the former
woodwind instruments instead of those newly available. If the 'Boehm' flutes or clarinets were
chosen by a given society, the players would have to
adapt to new fingerings. This implied a long time of
study which would be acceptable only if the advan
tages obtained justified the period of relearning. What was true for a
professional musician was not
equally so for a non professional. The music they had to play was at this period not very difficult and
was generally written in the easy keys of B flat or
E flat?it presented very few modulations and these were usually limited to neighbouring keys. In fact,
it was not necessary to change the instrument for a new one
simply because the music was easy to
play on the older models. Another reason is that teachers who had learnt on the old-style models and
who had been teaching for a long time, generally two or three decades or more, taught their pupils to
play on similar instruments. This explains why these
older instruments were kept for such a long time: it
would not be until the 20th century that they would
be replaced by 'Boehm' models, with the exception of a very few societies such as the wind ensembles of
Bernay and La Couture-Boussey, as has already been
shown.
For brass instruments, the situation was not the same. Former models were very difficult to play at
the right pitch or with the brilliance and volume that were necessary. So, when Adolphe Sax conceived the
saxophone, saxhorn and saxotromba, he cleverly
built them in entire families particularly suited for
wind ensembles and brass bands. They covered the
entire musical range from the highest to the lowest
note, and the different families provided instru
ments of good homogeneity, brilliance, volume and tune. So, they were easy to learn and it was possible to keep the same teacher for all brass instruments,
except saxophones, which were generally taught by the clarinet teacher in the small societies. The pupil
began on a soprano or an alto model and afterwards
had simply to adapt to the appropriate mouthpiece in order to play the lower ones. Though Adolphe Sax had not foreseen the progress of amateur
musical societies, his inventions still came at the best
time to improve a situation which was far from
brilliant.
But before concluding, and to underline the
pragmatic stance of many societies, I have to
mention a particular instrument, the so called
'Cecilium', invented in 1860 by Arthur Quentin de
Grommard (or Gromard, Gromare), the conductor
of the music of the city of Eu, in order to remedy the
shortage of certain instruments in musical societies, and especially the lack of string instruments which
could play the middle voices. This instrument has,
superficially, the form of a cello, and the sound is
made by free reeds activated by an airstream pro duced by bellows worked with a bow held in the
right hand of the player, while the left hand plays the
different notes by depressing little metal buttons
mounted on the neck. It sounds like a combination
of a cello, a bassoon and a French horn. This instru ment offers automatic transposition and was made
in different sizes?soprano, alto, tenor and bass,
thus spanning the entire range of an ensemble. It must be admitted that Grommard copied the
principles of Adolphe Sax in which his instruments were built in an entire family using the same
notation and the same fingerings, and they were easy to play. He presented his invention at the Universal
Exhibition of 1867 in Paris and obtained a dis tinction in the instrumental contest although his invention was neglected in the report written by
Francois Joseph Fetis. However, it proves that a
conductor of a musical society could also be an
inventor whenever needed. The 'Cecilum' was used
in the societies of Eu and neighbouring towns until
the beginning of the 20th century. Some of these
instruments are still extant, one is in the Museum
of Popular Music in Montlu^on (Departement of
12 Archives of the Service Historique de l'Armee de Terre (S.H.A.T.), cote 1 M 2 016.
This content downloaded from 216.87.207.2 on Mon, 18 Nov 2013 21:24:37 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
240 The Galpin Society Journal
Allier, central France) and a complete family is
preserved in the store rooms of the Musee de
Musique in Paris. There is another in the Balfour
Galleries of the Pitt Rivers Musical Instrument
Collection in Oxford. In Annexe 3 (see colour
supplement), Figures 1 to 4 there are illustrations of
the 'Symphonium', the prototype of the Cecilium,
patented in 1862, and a picture of Arthur Quentin de Grommard conducting his ensemble of
Ceciliums.
In conclusion despite the recommendations of the
makers and the Orpheonic authorities, amateur
musical societies adopted a middle way between
passivity and progress throughout the 19th century. Far from submitting to the attractions of fashion,
they preferred to keep their traditions without
giving up the benefits of progress in instrument
making whenever it was possible. In so doing, they
helped to ensure their continued existence and their
main objective of promoting music-making in all
parts of France.
SUMMARY Musical societies, whose numbers increased steadily
at the end of the Second Empire in France, were
particularly concerned with developments in instru
ment construction, especially wind instruments.
Many manufacturers, such as Besson and Sax, were
aware of the size of the market represented by non
military music and encouraged people to replace their old or obsolete instruments by new models.
National leaders ofthe wind band movement did the same and even proposed typical groupings of
instruments adapted for the players of the time.
Being under pressure, it would have been logical to
assume that instrumental groups would have been at
the forefront of such progress and would have
adopted the latest improvements invented and
patented by the manufacturers.
The example of the Upper Normandy societies
proves that on the contrary, a much more pragmatic
attitude was the rule. Because of the lack of finance, instruments were usually replaced one at a time, often by second-hand models. In addition, the most
efficient systems for woodwind were not adopted not only for reasons of tradition, but because the
technique required was more demanding. On the
other hand, improvements and new brass
instruments developed by Adolphe Sax?not only the saxhorns and saxo-trombas, but also saxo
phones had enormous success because of their
quality and regularity of timbre and because they were easy to play. However, to imagine that the
Upper Normandy wind band movement was too
conservative, would be incorrect?there was
certainly some hesitation in adopting the official
pitch standard, but the invention of the 'cecilium' is
evidence that a local conductor could be ingenious when it came to making up for a shortage of players.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am most grateful to Mme. Carouge and Mme.
Buxdorf, from the Archives of the Departement of
Eure and to Mme. Filiozat, former curator of the
Municipal Archives of Evreux, who permitted me to
have access to essential documents. My thanks also
go to M. Francois Camboulive, collector, for his
documentation, to Mme. Chantal Atamian, director
of the Tourism Office of Eu and her mother and to
Christine Lenoir and Pascal Joulain for the pictures ofthe 'Symphonium' and the 'Cecilium'.
This content downloaded from 216.87.207.2 on Mon, 18 Nov 2013 21:24:37 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Rauline?19th Century Amateur Music Societies in France 241
ANNEXE 1: FIRST SERIES OF NAMES FOR INSTRUMENTS RECOMMENDED BY
THE ORPHEONIC AUTHORITIES FOR USE IN WIND ENSEMBLES AND BRASS BANDS IN FRANCE
List I:
Generic names adopted by the Commission for
brass instruments
and indications ofthe instruments which can be
substituted for each other because ofthe similarity
of their pitch.
? Small high chromatic bugle in E flat
or high saxhorn in E flat or high chromatic clarion in E flat
? Valve cornet
or rotary valve cornet
? Contralto chromatic bugles in B flat
the same in A flat or alto saxhorn in B flat
or alto chromatic clarion in B flat
? Natural French horns with crooks in high B flat, A flat, G, F, E flat, D, C and low B flat
or chromatic rotary valve or valve French
horns
? Chromatic tenor in E flat or tenor saxhorn in E flat or saxotromba in E flat
or tenor chromatic clarion in E flat
or tenor bugle in E flat or keyhorn in E flat or alto ophicleide in ? flat
? Natural military trumpet in ? flat
or chromatic rotary valve or valve trumpet
or stop trumpet with terminal crooks,
playing easily the natural trumpet part
? Baritone in B flat or baritone saxhorn in B flat, with 3 rotary
valves
or baritone chromatic clarion in B flat, with
3 rotary valves
? Bass in B flat, with 4 rotary valves or ophicleide in
B flat or in C or bass saxhorn in B flat, with 4 rotary valves or bass chromatic clarion in B flat, with
4 rotary valves
? Contrabass in B flat or in ? flat or chromatic contrabass in B flat, with 4 rotary
valves
List II:
Pitches of chromatic instruments
compared with the pitches of voices.
? Small high chromatic bugle in E flat
Soprano (female voice)
? Valve cornet
Soprano (female voice)
? Contralto chromatic bugles in B flat
Contralto, with some notes of mezzo-soprano
(female voice)
? Chromatic trumpet
Soprano (female voice)
? Chromatic rotary valve or valved French horn
Contralto in the high notes
Tenor in the low notes, great range
? Chromatic tenor in E flat
Tenor (male voice)
? Chromatic baritone in B flat
Baritone (Singing bass) First bass of choirs
? Bass in B flat, with 4 rotary valves or ophicleide in
Bflat
Bass, second bass of choirs.
List III:
Instrumental groupings for brass bands and wind
ensembles
(1) Brass bands
Composed of 9 musicians
2 valve cornets 1 baritone in B flat 2 bugles in B flat 1 trombone
2 tenors in B flat, or 1 bass with 4 rotary French horns valves, or 1 ophicleide
Composed of 12 musicians
1 small bugle in E flat 2 trombones 2 valve cornets 1 baritone in B flat
This content downloaded from 216.87.207.2 on Mon, 18 Nov 2013 21:24:37 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
242 The Galpin Society Journal
2 bugles in B Rat 1 bass with 4 rotary
valves, or 1 ophicleide 2 tenors, or French horns 1 ophicleide
Composed of 15 musicians
1 small bugle in E flat 1 baritone in B flat
3 valve cornets 3 trombones
2 bugles in B flat 1 bass with 4 rotary 2 tenors, or French horns valves, or 1 ophicleide 1 trumpet 1 ophicleide
Composed of 21 musicians
1 small bugle in E flat 1 baritone in B flat
4 valve cornets 3 trombones
2 bugles in B flat 3 bass with 4 rotary 2 tenors, or altos valves, or ophicleides 2 French horns 1 ophicleide 2 trumpets A simple drum section
may be added
Composed of 30 musicians
2 small bugles in E flat 2 baritone in B flat
5 valve cornets 3 trombones 4 bugles in B flat 5 bass with 4 rotary 2 tenors, or altos valves, or
ophicleides
4 French horns 1 contrabass in E flat
2 trumpets A simple drum section
may be added and even
a pair of timpanis
'Over 30 musicians, there can be added two natural
cavalry or stop trumpets, two A flat chromatic
bugles, a fourth trombone, one or two basses and one B flat contrabass playing an octave lower than
the ordinary basses.
It is also possible to use a high B flat valve cornet
playing an octave higher than the ordinary cornet.
These additions can also be applied to most of the
complete wind ensembles to which E flat and B flat
saxophones can also be added.'
(2) Wind ensembles
Composed of 9 musicians
1 piccolo in D flat 2 French horns, or altos
1 small clarinet in ? flat in ? flat
2 clarinets in B flat 1 bassoon
1 valve cornet 1 bass with 4 rotary
valves, or 1 ophicleide
Composed of 12 musicians
1 piccolo in D flat 2 French horns, or altos 1 small clarinet in ? flat in ? flat
3 clarinets in B flat 1 bassoon
1 valve cornet 1 trombone
1 bugle in ? flat 1 bass with 4 rotary
valves, or 1 ophicleide
Composed of 21 musicians and 24 with the drum
section
1 piccolo in D flat 2 bassoons 1 small clarinet in ? flat 1 trumpet 1 oboe in D flat (sic) 2 trombones 1 solo clarinet in B flat 2 basses with 4 rotary 4 clarinets in B flat, valves, or ophicleides
1st and 2nd 1 contrabass in ? flat 1 valve cornet 3: a simple drum section
2 bugles or 2 second valve
cornets
2 French horns, or
2 altos in ? flat
Composed of 30 musicians and 33 with the drum
section
1 piccolo in D flat 2 tenors, or altos in
1 small clarinet in ? flat ? flat
1 oboe in D flat (sic) 2 bassoons
1 solo clarinet in B flat 2 trumpets 8 clarinets in B flat, 3 trombones
1st and 2nd 1 baritone
1 valve cornet 2 basses with 4 rotary 2 bugles or 2 second valves, or ophicleides
valve cornets 1 contrabass in ? flat
2 French horns 3: a simple drum section
Composed of 45 musicians and 50 with the drum
section
(actually, respectively 46 and 51 musicians)
1 piccolo in D flat 1 great flute in D flat or in ? flat
2 oboes in D flat (sic) 1 solo clarinet in B flat
2 small clarinets in ? flat
12 clarinets in B flat, 1st and 2nd
1 small bugle in ? flat
2 valve cornets
2 bugles in ? flat
4 French horns
2 tenors, or altos in ? flat 2 bassoons
2 trumpets
This content downloaded from 216.87.207.2 on Mon, 18 Nov 2013 21:24:37 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Rauline?19th Century Amateur Music Societies in France 243
3 trombones
2 baritones 5 basseswith 4 rotary valves, or ophicleides 1 contrabass in ? flat
1 contrabass in B flat
5: the full drum section
ANNEXE II: INSTRUMENTS RECOMMENDED BY JULES SIMON FOR BRASS BANDS AND WIND ENSEMBLES (INCLUDING SAX'S INSTRUMENTS).
(1) Brass bands
Brass bands of 5 musicians :
1 contralto saxhorn in B flat 1 rotary valve cornet in B flat 1 tenor saxhorn in ? flat 1 baritone saxhorn in B flat 1 bass saxhorn with 4 rotary valves in B flat.
Brass bands of 8 musicians :
The previous 5 +
1 second contralto saxhorn in B flat
1 second tenor saxhorn in ? flat 1 contrabass saxhorn in ? flat.
Brass bands of 10 musicians :
The previous 8 +
1 small saxhorn in ? flat 1 second bass saxhorn with 4 rotary valves in B flat.
Brass bands of 12 musicians :
The previous 10 +
1 second rotary valve cornet in B flat 1 second baritone saxhorn in B flat.
Brass bands of 15 musicians :
The previous 12 +
2 rotary valve trumpets in ? flat
1 rotary valve trombone in B flat.
Brass bands of 16 musicians :
The previous 15 +
1 contrabass saxhorn in B flat.
Over 16 musicians, Jules Simon recommends 'tastefully' doubling the previous parts showing the melody and the bass part in a favourable light. Three other larger brass ensembles follow.
Brass bands of 21 musicians :
1 high small saxhorn in B flat 1 small soprano saxhorn in ? flat
3 contralto saxhorns in B flat 3 alto saxotrombas in ? flat 2 baritone saxotrombas in B flat 2 bass saxhorns in B flat 1 contrabass saxhorn in ? flat 1 low contrabass saxhorn in B flat 2 rotary valve cornets in B flat 2 rotary valve trumpets in ? flat 3 rotary valve tenors trombones in B flat.
Brass bands of 37 musicians :
The previous 27 +
1 small soprano saxhorn in ? flat 1 second contralto saxhorn in A flat 1 fourth alto saxotromba in ? flat 1 second contrabass saxhorn in ? flat 1 second contrabass saxhorn in 13 flat 2 new rotary valve trumpets in B flat
(up to 6 trumpets) 3 trombones with an alto and two basses
(up to 6 trombones).
N.B. Trumpets and trombones constitute the shrill
part ofthe brass band. The small B flat high saxhorn
is not easy to play: it is necessary to have strong lips and to maintain them by constant exercise. If a high B flat saxhorn is not available, replace it by a second
B flat soprano saxhorn.
This content downloaded from 216.87.207.2 on Mon, 18 Nov 2013 21:24:37 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
244 The Galpin Society Journal
Brass bands of 27 musicians :
The previous 21 +
1 fourth contralto saxhorn in B flat 1 alto saxhorn in A Hat
2 bass saxhorns with 4 rotary valves in B Hat (up to
4 bass saxhorns) 2 rotary valve trumpets in ? flat (indeed 4 trumpets).
(2) Wind ensembles
Jules Simon subsequently lists a wind ensemble proposed by Sax which he considers is excellent for a small
number of musicians:
1 piccolo 1 contralto saxhorn in B Hat 1 small clarinet 2 alto saxtrombas in ? flat
1 great clarinet 1 baritone saxhorn in B Hat
1 oboe 2 bass saxhorns with 4 rotary valves in B Hat 1 saxophone quartet 1 contrabass saxhorn in ? flat 1 valve or a rotary valve cornet 1 low contrabass saxhorn in ? flat 1 rotary valve trumpet 1 timpani player. 2 trombones
1 soprano saxhorn in ? flat
This gives 22 players. If the ? flat soprano saxhorn?the least easy to play?is lacking, one can replace it by a second valve or rotary valve cornet. Jules Simon proposes some solutions to increase the number of
musicians:
? for 23 musicians : the previous 22 + a 2nd rotary valve cornet ? for 24 musicians : the previous 23 + a 2nd rotary valve trumpet ? for 25 musicians : the previous 24 + a 3rd trombone ? for 26 musicians : the previous 25 + a 2nd contralto saxhorn in B flat ? for 27 musicians : the previous 26 + a 3rd alto saxotromba in ? flat ? for 28 musicians : the previous 27 + a 2nd baritone saxhorn in B Hat ? for 29 musicians : the previous 28 + a 2nd clarinet ? for 30 musicians : the previous 29 + a great flute ? for 31 musicians : the previous 30 + a 2nd oboe ? for 32 musicians : the previous 31 + a 2nd small clarinet.
If the number of players is over 32, the parts should be doubled in order of importance (first the melody, next
basses and then the inner voices). Jules Simon then gives guidance on the composition of larger ensembles.
? Ensembles for French army regiments (40 players):
1 great flute 3 bass saxhorns with 4 rotary valves in B Hat
1 piccolo 1 contrabass saxhorn in ? flat
2 small clarinets 1 low contrabass saxhorn in B Hat
4 great clarinets Clear or rolling drum, bass drum and cymbals. 2 oboes 1 double saxophone quartet 2 valve cornets
2 rotary valve trumpets 3 trombones 2 contralto saxhorns in B Hat
3 alto saxotrombas in ? flat
2 baritone saxhorns in B Hat
This content downloaded from 216.87.207.2 on Mon, 18 Nov 2013 21:24:37 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Rauline?19th Century Amateur Music Societies in France 245
The composition of ensembles for the elite regiments, including the Regiment of Guides, the Gendarmerie
of Paris (56 players):
the previous 40 +
2 small clarinets (indeed 4 on the whole) 4 great clarinets (indeed 8 on the whole) 2 rotary valve trumpets (indeed 4 on the whole) 1 trombone (indeed 4 on the whole) 2 small soprano saxhorns in E flat
1 bass saxhorn in B Hat (indeed 4 on the whole) 1 contrabass saxhorn in ? flat (indeed 2 on the
whole) 1 low contrabass saxhorn in B Hat (indeed 2 on the
whole) 1 second pair of cymbals ldrum.
This content downloaded from 216.87.207.2 on Mon, 18 Nov 2013 21:24:37 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
218 The Galpin Society Journal
19th Century Amateur Music Societies in
France ?
Jean-Yves Rauline
i| ANNEXE III: THE CECILIUM
I 11 Hr B i|j The prototype of the Cecilium (patented in 1862) was the B I I _m
P ^ 'Symphonium', however this name was not used by Grommard I ||B:r IfM S since it had already been used by another maker. B 1_ _! iH
__1 lift B fl B __BI imm .
H J9| Upper left: Cecilium with the front cover removed showing the B B B HB ^
HJTj^ bellows operated by the player using a bow (unfortunately III |Zi ^F*V broken) which fits onto a projection at the top ofthe lever B B JJK? ;1
1 B VJSPl running up from the 'tail'. In the picture, this lever is seen at I j^BB*"* % I lf______i
about 30 degrees from the right ofthe vertical, compressing the B ^^Emumm? ? ^Pflifl
bellows to the right and expanding the bellows to the left. J_______? ^ w* H ijfil#ttRn\ ?.-'. Movement ofthe lever causes the bellows to pump air to the
H^^^BiP*, -Affff^^^P
reeds above. The upper half of the instrument contains the free ^^^^^HM*** JWTlMf 9* reeds which are operated by the buttons on the neck. ___________ _ '^
~^BINMlH_nEra Upper right: The instrument with the front replaced.The point of ^m^^^^Bi'' '
_ISflki?lrfifflM attachment ofthe 'bow' can be seen towards the right ofthe ?&________________?>
MwH^bBmbK curved slit about halfway up the instrument. ^^^^^^^^^KIP
JHHH||^B_______| Lower left: The rear ofthe button mechanism in the neck, by flH_____________fifP^ H^HBHR^^^H
which the notes played are changed, with the external cover M______________|r*r
^^HI|B_______B removed.
W_^9______r^_l^ha*
H^^^^BH^^^H Lower right: The front ofthe button mechanism with the JrTW..
T?r^jZ Jf_' *^
KEISBBhBBBBI external cover replaced. t^wS^Wp'^^^m'
1 Below: Arthur de Grommard conducting his ensemble of ^| al
l| Ik % ]_
1 _h :IhShR-'
Iflftiiik ?i___'. ^_^______85_& "$t: >'.M3E& flBM?HMMM^ga"*' -,;,?Mfc, . ̂ sV!:': pS /_^_^_^_^_^__l b__h i'SilSgiJaME. "'
_HH|_B_^__P^. _* LftHi-ii__^__WBWEr '%___& ?,r a j <^siiM?.* ** /_^_^_^_^_I_^___V
This content downloaded from 216.87.207.2 on Mon, 18 Nov 2013 21:24:37 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions